Feline Warrior

Bush Calls Pope ‘Champion of Human Dignity’

Like he’d fuckin’ know!

CNN.com - Illinois governor: No delays in birth control prescriptions - Apr 1, 2005

Blagojevich’s bio says: “A former golden gloves boxer, Blagojevich is committed to fighting a system that accepts corruption, mediocrity and failure, and pledges to make everyday life better for average working families in Illinois.”

I think I like this guy.

But to the issue, pharmacists and their beliefs, and what Blagojevich has done about it in Illinois (exerpt from the linked article):

“CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) — Gov. Rod Blagojevich approved an emergency rule Friday requiring pharmacies to fill birth control prescriptions quickly after a Chicago pharmacist refused to fill an order because of moral opposition to the drug.”

This has become an issue, pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions based on their (the pharmacists’) “moral beliefs.” What hooey! What’s next, pharmacists who agree with Knucklead Falwell’s statement that AIDS is “God’s punishment for homosexuals” and thus refusing to fill ’scripts for AIDS-related medications?

Nonsense.

I’m starting a new post on this, as I’ve been multi-tasking and have found other sources I’d like to share.

Of course, we’ve known this all along. Try this: play a fun little game here. Sadly, the game gets its funny answers from actual “teaching materials” being used in abstinence-only sex ed programs in the US.

I did a paper last year about the hidden badness of the welfare reform bill, which included state funding for sex ed only if it was abstinence-only sex ed. Now we’re looking at Bush’s budget for 2006, which, according to NARAL Pro-Choice America, “…proposes an additional $38 million for abstinence-only programs, bringing the yearly total to $206 million. Such programs have seen their funding increase more than 50% since 2004, despite the fact that they are largely unproven…”

Said NARAL Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan, “He says he’s against abortion, but rather than provide young people with all the facts, he increases funding for unproven abstinence-only programs that censor, mislead, and misinform. His budget would add $38 million to these unproven abstinence-only programs, yet cut $301 million from programs that train doctors at children’s hospitals.”

And really, it’s helpful to bring the children’s hospital piece into the picture, for the sake of garnering sympathy and such (”Ohhh, the poor, sick, ignored children!”), but the point isn’t even what the funding was diverted from so much as it is about a governmental ban on fact-based information that really can be life-saving. (And life-enhancing, -prolonging, and so forth.)

Studies show that abstinence-only sex ed does not work. Don’t get me wrong - I do not advocate teens and pre-teens going out there to hump like bunnies. However, the facts show that giving people MORE information is helpful, not detrimental. Comprehensive sex education provides young people with information about how to say “no,” about how to get and use condoms if they choose to have sex, for example.

I understand wanting to tell young people to wait until they are older to have sex. Maybe even until marriage, if one believes that is most appropriate. There are consequences that teens don’t think about (or are not aware of, or think don’t concern them) -not just pregnancy, not just STDs and HIV- but all of that emotional stuff. Kids whose relationships with their parents are not open enough to discuss sex in a general, even informative, way very likely would not be open enough to talk about the hurt they’re feeling because everyone in school says they’re a ho’, for example.

How wonderful it would be if all parents could teach age-appropriate sex education at home. Ideally, they would include the family (and/or religious) values, yet would make certain that their kids were equipped with enough information that, should they stray from the family’s values, their lives would not be altered forever.

I’m saying… Teach your children the values you want them to believe in - share your values! And at the same time, remember that your children do not live in a vacuum, that there are pressures out there beyond a pushy date or peer pressure, but visual images, societal suggestions about how males and females should look, behave, and so on. Prepare them for that world! Give them all the information, not just some of it.

Another important piece to this abstinence-only education is that it does not address GLBT/Q youth. (GLBT = gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender. Q = Questioning, which refers to those who think they might be GLB or T.) If abstinence-only education does address sexuality issues, I feel certain that it does not do so in a positive, informative manner.

But shouldn’t GLBT/Q youth have comprehensive information? I understand that there are those who feel that being gay (etc.) is anti-Bible, yet this really isn’t a Bible-based country. If it was, we could just use the Bible as our sex ed tool (and maybe that’s what the abstinence-only folks do!), and then women could go out to the desert while menstruating, wear head coverings, and so forth. I digress… Comprehensive sex education enables young people to learn about their own bodies, how to take care of those bodies, as well as allowing GLBT/Q youth to be included in the discussion.

Still on the GLBT/Q topic, currently, most people in that population are not allowed to marry in this country - so telling that population to wait until marriage to have sex doesn’t make sense. (Of course, I don’t doubt that GLBT/Q youth are left out of the abstinence-only sex ed on purpose - because if you are GLBT, waiting until marriage means that you will never have sex! And that is good because the religious-right would prefer that the GLBT crowd not have sex at all.) (”Don’t ask, don’ tell… but really, now that we think about it… just don’t do it at all…”) Young people of all orientations deserve factual information that helps them to develop positive body images and senses of self, as well as the down ‘n dirty facts that will help them make healthy choices regarding sex.

There are parents who are loathe to discuss sex with their children. It’s awkward, difficult, and what do you say? There is information and support out there for parents and caretakers! Check out Advocates for Youth’s Parents’ Sex Ed Center. AFY discusses age-appropriate sex ed, “teachable moments,” and all manner of ways for everyone from parents to grandparents to be educators.

Ideally, the basics would be taught at home - but we know that so many parents do not do this, and would prefer to have the schools do it. If sex education is to be included in the public school curriculum, it must provide comprehensive information that is not only fact-based but also positive in nature.